Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

iTunes On OS X Finally Has Competition

Posted by timothy on Thu Nov 06, 2008 05:34 PM
from the file-managers-that-also-play-music dept.
mallumax writes "The truth is, iTunes is an average music player. Though the UI is simple and good like most Apple products, it has lagged in features compared to music players available on Linux and Windows. A feature as basic as monitoring a folder and adding the latest music files to the library is unavailable in iTunes. There are no plugins or themes. Despite the many faults, many of us continued to use iTunes because of the lack of options available. But today the wait is finally over. Not one, but two music players have become credible contenders. Songbird: An open source music player which has been in the works for more than 2 years has finally released its 1.0 Release Candidate builds. The team behind Songbird has members who previously developed for both Winamp and the Yahoo Music Engine. It has support for extensions and themes ('feathers' in Songbird parlance). Amarok: The undisputed champion among Linux music players is finally coming to OS X, thanks to KDE 4 being ported there. Amarok developer Leo Franchi has been able to run a Amarok on OS X natively. So we can expect a reasonably stable Amarok to hit OS X in a few months' time. Hopefully these players will gain traction among OS X users, which will finally force Apple to either step up in terms of features or open up iTunes for extensions."
apple software media music stretchthatanalogy
apple media
story

Related Stories

[+] Your Rights Online: Apple DMCAs iPodHash Project 357 comments
TRS-80 writes "Apple has sent a DMCA takedown notice to the IpodHash project, claiming it circumvents their FairPlay DRM scheme. Some background: Apple first added a hash to the iTunesDB file in 6th-gen iPods, but it was quickly reverse-engineered. They changed it with the release of iPhone 2.0 and a project was started to reverse the new hash, but wasn't successful yet. My guess is Apple used the same algorithm as FairPlay for the new hash, so Apple could use the DMCA to prevent competing apps like Songbird and Banshee from talking to iPods/iPhones. BTW, don't tell Apple, but the project uses a wiki, so the old page versions from before the takedown are still there."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login
Loading... please wait.
  • Lacking Support (Score:5, Insightful)

    by almostinsane (770051) on Thursday November 06, @05:36PM (#25667809)
    Apple iPhones, iPod Touch and Microsoft Zune devices are not yet supported. Yeah, big contender.
  • Basic feature? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 2nd Post! (213333) <gundbear&pacbell,net> on Thursday November 06, @05:38PM (#25667847) Homepage

    A feature as basic as monitoring a folder and adding the latest music files to the library is unavailable in iTunes

    I don't think of this as a basic feature... essentially you are asking for automated library updates whenever new files are added to the system. iTunes is built around two methods of file importation: Rip from CD or add from iTunes Store. The third option is manual: Drag and drop files to the library.

    Plugins [apple.com] are even listed at Apple's website.

    Themes are missing, I admit, but for many people this is not a "basic feature", either.

      • Re:Basic feature? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by lupis42 (1048492) on Thursday November 06, @06:36PM (#25668727)
        Because the filesystem doesn't do the two big things that "libraries" do, associate metadata and simplify searching.
        • Re:Basic feature? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Moridineas (213502) on Thursday November 06, @06:23PM (#25668521) Journal

          I have a naming convention that identifies my work from the directory and filename. iTunes basically strips this info, making it pretty useless for me.

          So you're NOT using file metadata? That would seem to be the easiest solution, and makes a whole variety of software and players like your mp3s better.

          Additionally, iTunes..Preferences..uncheck "Keep iTunes Music folder organized" with a nice little description of everything that that means below it. That option has been around as long as I have been using itunes.

  • iPod (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rogabean (741411) <rgeistlinger@gmail. c o m> on Thursday November 06, @05:40PM (#25667875) Homepage
    It's not a replacement unless it can sync with and manage my iPhone and iPod.
  • by Drake42 (4074) * on Thursday November 06, @05:40PM (#25667877) Homepage

    I like iTunes specifically because it doesn't waste my time with themes and skins and color choices. How cares what your music player looks like? How many times has an attractive woman looked at the customized UI for your software and thought "Wow. There's a guy I'd like to get it on with". (Answer: Zero)

    I'll grant that some competition might drive additional features into iTunes, but please please please can we stop acting like altering the UI of a program does anything even remotely useful?

  • The Truth (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Trojan35 (910785) on Thursday November 06, @05:42PM (#25667901)

    The truth is, iTunes is an average music player. Though the UI is simple and good like most Apple products, it has lagged in features compared to music players available on Linux and Windows.

    The features it is missing are niche features. How many of these "more feature complete" players you are using have features like Genius playlists? Video podcasts? How many also seemlessly manage the songs on your mp3(iPod) player? Smartphones(iPhone)? How many offer iTunes music sharing/streaming on the local network? How many seamlessly integrate with the most popular music store?

    That's not even including the non-music features of itunes, such as syncing calendars, contacts, photos, applications, and songs with iPods and iPhones. It offers video podcasts, downloadable tv shows, and streaming internet radio.

    iTunes missing one feature compared to other players does not mean it has less features overall.

  • by slifox (605302) * on Thursday November 06, @05:42PM (#25667905)

    This may be a little off-topic, but I'd like to recommend mpd.

    mpd (music player daemon) is a minimalistic audio-playing server that can be accessed using a variety of clients, including those with command-line, web, and GUI interfaces.

    Separating the GUI from the core of the audio player increases stability and decreases the chance for problems. I've never once had the mpd core crash, even though the GUI clients do sometimes crash. When my X server dies for whatever reason, my music continues playing while I fix things!

    Additionally, you can do some very cool things, like copying or moving the mpd player state between networked computers. For instance, with the command 'mpmv desktop tvserver', I can move the currently playing song, the current position in the song, and the current playlist. With some occupancy sensors, your music can literally follow you around the house

    My favorite GUI client is QMPDClient. It has a very powerful music library interface, including a: playlist; a queue within the playlist (to jump around the playlist); library, directory, and playlist views, with artist/album/track views. This is excellent, because I keep my music directories well organized, so the "Directory" view lets me take advantage of this easily (a feature that I've not found in other music library clients).

    And yes, mpd does work on MacOS :)

    MPD: http://mpd.wikia.com/wiki/Music_Player_Daemon_Wiki [wikia.com]
    QMPDClient: http://havtknut.tihlde.org/qmpdclient/ [tihlde.org]

  • Uhh... what? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by drhamad (868567) on Thursday November 06, @05:42PM (#25667911) Homepage
    We don't use iTunes because there's no credible competitor - we use iTunes because it links to the iPod and/or the AppleTV and/or Front Row. brFurther, I don't understand why people always whine about "not monitoring a folder for library changes." Who cares? I mean, apparently some people do, because they whine about it... but the iTunes Library is your music manager, not your OS folders. Treat it that way and monitoring a folder becomes irrelevant.
  • Folder actions (Score:5, Informative)

    by MushMouth (5650) on Thursday November 06, @05:42PM (#25667913) Homepage

    There is a simple way to automatically add items to iTunes, set up a folder actions script. Its simple, it works with anything, and its built in.

  • VLC (Score:5, Insightful)

    by boshi (612264) on Thursday November 06, @06:01PM (#25668205) Homepage
    It seems a bit unfair to say that iTunes has had no competitors under Mac OSX as a music player when VLC does an admirable job at playing my music and TV shows, on OSX, and has done for a long time now.
  • by Space cowboy (13680) * on Thursday November 06, @06:03PM (#25668243) Journal

    Monitoring a folder is something you can script [dougscripts.com]. Slashdotters ought have no problems with this...

    Applescript (weird, english-like language that it is) is actually pretty powerful - Apple do make an effort to open up their apps for scripting, even though they're really GUI apps, and it's a really under-used feature. Shame.

    Simon

  • by vux984 (928602) on Thursday November 06, @06:12PM (#25668385)

    The truth is, iTunes is an average music player.

    itunes is significantly better than average.

    A feature as basic as monitoring a folder and adding the latest music files to the library is unavailable in iTunes.

    How exactly is that a basic feature? Music enters itunes 3 basic ways:
    1 you rip a Cd with itunes.
    2 you buy a song from itunes music store
    3 you drag a file from your computer onto the itunes library
    and one advanced way:
    4 you tell itunes to import music from a folder

    Setting up itunes to monitor a folder would be number 5, and in the 'advanced feature' category.

    Secondly, how exactly do the "latest music files" get into this monitored folder? If you manually dragged them there, then you might as well have just manually dragged them onto the itunes window. If they arrived there through any other means, that just further underscores that its an advanced feature.

    There are no plugins

    That is certainly not a basic feature either. And its probably the ONLY thing I sort of agree with.

    I'd like iTunes to support automatically syncing with non-Apple players. I'd like iTunes to support syncing with programs other than Outlook on Windows.

    [There are no] themes.

    I call that a feature. I'm not 13 anymore. I am happy to let my programs to feature well designed UI, without delegating the task to other 13 year olds who variously have an unhealthy fascination with celebrities, movies, or just want everything to be some sort of gothic red and black. If anything, I think iTunes on Windows should look MORE like a windows app.

    Despite the many faults, many of us continued to use iTunes because of the lack of options available.

    Its few faults and many strengths actually. The biggest advantage it has over other players is that it works with =all= ipods/iphones seamlessly.

    Songbird: An open source music player which has been in the works for more than 2 years has finally released its 1.0 Release Candidate builds. The team behind Songbird has members who previously developed for both Winamp and the Yahoo Music Engine.

    Hardly a ringing endorsement if you look at either of those products.

    It has support for extensions and themes ('feathers' in Songbird parlance).

    Right, because inventing non-standard gimmick terminology is always a good idea. I'm glad Thunderbird has addons not 'feathers' and firefox...? 'hairs'? 'teeth'? Spare me.

    Amarok: The undisputed champion among Linux music players is finally coming to OS X, thanks to due KDE 4 being ported to OS X. Amarok developer Leo Franchi has been able to run a Amarok on OS X natively. So we can expect a reasonably stable Amarok to hit OS X in a few months' time.

    'reasonably stable' with a KDE4 look on OSX? Yeah that's going to create an army of converts.

    Hopefully these players will gain traction among OS X users,

    They won't. They will make a very small niche (self)-satisfied. That's not a bad thing, per se, mind you, but don't make more out of it than is really there.

    which will finally force Apple to either step up in terms of features or open up iTunes for extensions."

    See above. It won't. Even though I really do want iTunes to work with Thunderbird instead of Outlook...

  • by ars (79600) <assd2.dsgml@com> on Thursday November 06, @06:21PM (#25668485) Homepage

    How is Amarok the undisputed champion when it reportedly it can't handle massive playlists? (I haven't tried it myself, but that's what I'm reading.)

    I'm looking for a linux player that can handle thousands of songs, and ideally would allow me to rate each song as I hear it.

    I tried Audacious, but it had so many bugs it was unusable (it kept loosing the playlist, or using 100% cpu, or deleting all the prefs). I tried juk but it's playlist was far too annoying to use - I want it to play all the songs, not stop at the end of an album just because I happen to be looking at the album playlist.

    So, any suggestions? I'm using xmms right now, which works fine, but is discontinued (and doesn't have the rating feature, or an easy way to search for songs).

    Anyway, I'd like to use amarok - it looks like it has all the features I want, except being able to handle thousands of songs.

  • by diamondsw (685967) on Thursday November 06, @06:44PM (#25668845)

    ...when it came out. And it trounced it. That was back when said competition had themes, visualizers, and a host of features iTunes didn't. iTunes, on the other hand, is excellently designed software, and killed off Audion and others.

    Songbird and Amarok will fail utterly on the Mac. Songbird will use the same non-native XUL engine that Firefox and Thunderbird use with far fewer benefits, and Amarok will be QT-based, which in many cases looks and feels even less native than XUL. Neither will have any platform integration with the huge number of iTunes addons, scripts, widgets, etc. And of course, neither of them will work with the iPod, let alone the iTunes Music Store (if you care for such a thing).

    • Re:Themes? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by boshi (612264) on Thursday November 06, @05:56PM (#25668125) Homepage
      I think very few themes actually contribute to the usability of a program. Most of the time I look at an archive of themes for a program it's flooded with various nearly-unusable pictures-of-bikini-girls-made-into-interfaces type themes.
      On the rare chance I find a theme I genuinely like, it's for a slightly older version of the program and half of the elements are broken.
      When are developers going to admit that they should just stick to the OS's GUI toolkit? The user can then theme their entire window manager, instead of each individual program.
    • Re:Themes? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Hatta (162192) on Thursday November 06, @06:12PM (#25668389) Journal

      I'm reminded of this comment sent to jwz [jwz.org]:

      Makali wrote:

                  Whenever a programmer thinks, "Hey, skins, what a cool idea", their computer's speakers should create some sort of cock-shaped soundwave and plunge it repeatedly through their skulls.

      I am fully in support of this proposed audio-cock technology.

      • Re:Themes? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Snowblindeye (1085701) on Thursday November 06, @06:04PM (#25668249)

        Because people disagree on what "clean simple" means. If the UI is not themeable and you don't like it, you have to switch to a different player altogether. If it is themeable, you just need to switch to a different theme.

        I don't buy that. Does skinning really achieve that? I don't think I've ever seen a skin that really improved usability. Or really changed it much.

        And most people, especially average users, go with the default skin anyway. IMHO, skinning just slows things down, and it often breaks with the UI standards.

      • Re:Themes? (Score:5, Funny)

        by mrchaotica (681592) * on Thursday November 06, @07:11PM (#25669187)

        If the UI is not themeable and you don't like it...

        ...then you're pretty fucking stupid for continuing to use OS X at all, because iTunes is just like every other damn OS X application!